2013 REG Wiley Book Question, Module 35, MCQ 115

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #176533
    whopper
    Participant

    All,

    I’m coming up with $1300 for the answer but Wiley shows $2700 as the answer. I think Wiley’s answer is wrong because John is not a dependent due to being age 26 and makes $3900. Is anyone getting the Wiley answer? If so, can you please explain the misunderstanding in my logic?

    REG - 89, 04/29/13
    BEC - 81, 08/06/13
    FAR - 84, 12/19/13
    AUD - 82, 10/05/13

Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #404562
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I have no clue but I'm going to give this a bump for you! You might want to post the entire question. That may help you get an answer.

    #404563
    whopper
    Participant

    During 2012, Mr. and Mrs. Benson provided substantially all the support, in their home, for their son John, age 26, and for Mrs. Benson's cousin Nancy, age 17. John had $3900 of income for 2012, and Nancy's income was $2500. The Bensons paid the following medical expenses during the year.

    Medicines and drugs:

    For themselves $400

    For John $500

    For Nancy $100

    Doctors

    For themselves $600

    For John $900

    For Nancy $200

    What is the total amount of medical expenses (before application of any limitation rules), that would enter into the calculation of itemized deductions on the Bensons' 2012 tax return?

    I'm coming up with $1300 for the answer but Wiley shows $2700 as the answer. I think Wiley's answer is wrong because John is not a dependent due to being age 26 and makes $3900. Is anyone getting the Wiley answer? If so, can you please explain the misunderstanding in my logic?

    REG - 89, 04/29/13
    BEC - 81, 08/06/13
    FAR - 84, 12/19/13
    AUD - 82, 10/05/13

    #404564
    J
    Member

    I don't think that the gross income test has to be met for the deduction of medical expenses (only the relationship, support, and citizenship tests must be met). Hence all of it would be deductible, obviously to the extent that it exceeds 7.5% of AGI, but this question specifically notes to not consider AGI limitation.

    #404565
    whopper
    Participant

    Thanks for the insight! Here are my thoughts…Since John is age 26, then he fails the qualifying child test and is now reviewed for the qualifying relative test. To determine a qualifying relative, one must pass the gross income test. However, he makes too much $ so cannot be claimed on the taxpayer's return. Therefore, John's associated medical expenses cannot be deducted since John cannot be claimed. This is where I'm debating Wiley's answer that John's expenses can be included. I thought to claim medical expenses, the individual must be a spouse or dependent.

    REG - 89, 04/29/13
    BEC - 81, 08/06/13
    FAR - 84, 12/19/13
    AUD - 82, 10/05/13

    #404566
    whopper
    Participant

    Thanks for the insight! Here are my thoughts…Since John is age 26, then he fails the qualifying child test and is now reviewed for the qualifying relative test. To determine a qualifying relative, one must pass the gross income test. However, he makes too much $ so cannot be claimed on the taxpayer's return. Therefore, John's associated medical expenses cannot be deducted since John cannot be claimed. This is where I'm debating Wiley's answer that John's expenses can be included. I thought to claim medical expenses, the individual must be a spouse or dependent.

    REG - 89, 04/29/13
    BEC - 81, 08/06/13
    FAR - 84, 12/19/13
    AUD - 82, 10/05/13

    #404567
    J
    Member

    I understand exactly your perspective. I think the difference is that for medical expense deductions, the rules for a qualifying relative as a dependent are different from the rules for a qualifying relative for exemptions. Confusing, right?

    Just because John wouldn't qualify as a dependent for an exemption doesn't necessarily disqualify him as a qualifying relative for medical expense purposes. I actually checked IRS Publication 502 to confirm this; there is no gross income requirement in the determination.

    Therefore I think Wiley's logic is correct… definitely a difficult question because of the difference of the definition of qualifying relative.

    #404568
    whopper
    Participant

    Awesome! Thanks for the clarification. I was scratching my head forever on this one. Happy Tuesday 🙂

    REG - 89, 04/29/13
    BEC - 81, 08/06/13
    FAR - 84, 12/19/13
    AUD - 82, 10/05/13

Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • The topic ‘2013 REG Wiley Book Question, Module 35, MCQ 115’ is closed to new replies.